What I found most interesting about the framework was their identification of the four types of power that is utilized within the four different quadrants. Those who practice punitive discipline must maintain a high sense of control therefore, use authoritarian power to assign consequences to the student. On the other side of the spectrum there are educators that practice a permissive style that executes paternal power over students. Paternal power in the educational setting suggests that teachers act as parents and make discipline decisions based off their belief that they know what is best for the student. While this is done from a genuine place of concern for their wellbeing, it allows the majority of the control to be in the hands of the students and not the teacher. The permissive teacher is far more likely to accept a lower quality of work and behavior in favor of maintaining a caring relationship with the student with the hope of self regulation coming naturally. In addition to these two approaches, the framework includes the approach of using no power (neglect) and the ideal approach of restorative practice which balances authoritative power out by building relationships to foster everyone's ability to execute their own power.
Paternalism as a form of power was a new concept for me. My curiosity was sparked by the use of "paternal" instead of "maternal". I wondered if the word suggested a generalized power held by parents, or a power held by men and not women. Further, I wondered if the use of the word "permissive" described a tendency to allow others to do things that are traditionally defined as morally wrong. If that was the case then why use the word "permissive" instead of "submissive"?
As a teacher that works in a school that just recently started to incorporate positive behavior interventions based on restorative practices, I know what a struggle it is to consistently stay in one quadrant. While I was considering what to focus on for Exploration Five I thought back to all of the struggles we had as a staff to unite under this one approach to discipline. While we had all worked together over the summer to create a model that we agreed on, as the school year rolled out I watched as teachers defaulted back into their more comfortable non-restorative responses. Some were authoritative while others were permissive. As an art teacher, I have always said that my classroom environment and management style is different from everyone else's because art requires more flexibility. Sure, sometimes students went too far "over the line" but how else were they going to learn? I set loose expectations for their conduct in my room because I wanted them to be able to explore how to set their own limits. The more I thought about it, I realized that most of the characteristics that made my classroom "unique" were not a byproduct of things outside of my control, they were the result of me choosing not to control them. I found myself faced with a hard truth. I was not an educator in the restorative quadrant, but in the permissive one instead. This realization created a tension inside of me fed by a nagging doubt that asked, "How do I teach without control? Does this mean I have no power? Is this something I need to fix? Does this mean I am failing as a teacher?"
So, my research process began with the desire to explore my identity as a teacher through the lens of paternalism. Specifically, I wanted to focus on my everyday habits that "allowed" for a lower quality of behavior, or lower expectations from those around me. Facing the obstacle of finding something I could collect data on while in quarantine, I had to consider what habits I unconsciously had inside and outside of the classroom. To do this, I reduced the window of discipline down to the “For/Permissive/Paternalistic” quadrant and compared it against the “To/Punitive/Authoritarian” quadrant. I chose to compare these two because I knew that the habit I was looking for demonstrated an unconscious lack of control. It would be easier for me to see what was missing by using the authoritarian quadrant to define what "should" be there.
I looked at the three words in each quadrant and considered their roots and synonyms. For each word I also considered the phrases or large ideas affiliated to them. For some of these words and phrases I was able to further map how they related to systemic norms beyond the realm of education. I suddenly saw a conflict within the defining framework itself.
A teacher that executes a punitive style of discipline uses their authoritative power to take control over or influence a student or situation. This process is inherently dominating and hierarchical in nature. On the other hand, a teacher that applies a permissive style of discipline uses their paternalistic power for compassion to nurture a student. The paternal power that is referenced within this framework is based off of the very traditional belief that within the structure of the nuclear family, the power to decide what is best for the children lies in the hands of the father. Similar to the punitive style, the permissive way of approaching discipline uses this traditional structure of hierarchy founded in genetics to justify making important choices for children. The permissive and authoritarian approaches as seen through the framework of restorative practices are united by the assumption that teachers naturally assert themselves and assume their authority and power within the classroom based off existing power structures. However, we can not be blind to the fact that these power structures are not only inherently hierarchal but also patriarchal in nature.
No matter what quadrant you place yourself within the window of discipline, you must consider your relationship to control. Even in restorative practices, it is the teachers responsibility to be authoritative and assert themselves to help encourage students to maintain healthy boundaries and set limits. Within the patriarchal system, the traits of assertion and confidence are praised and encouraged of young boys. On the other hand, as young girls we are taught to be submissive and to keep our thoughts to ourselves. Women are taught that our strength lies in our ability to feel, while simultaneously acknowledging that being overly emotional is perceived as weakness. We are all told that we are born with a natural capacity to nurture and so we follow our maternal instincts to the only occupation that makes sense, teaching.
If we are to confront the fact that patriarchy oppresses a woman's ability to exercise control and inhibits her ability to be assertive, how can we expect to ever progress away from a paternalistic style of discipline?
Before I followed the focus on gender any further, I wanted to make sure that the assumption that most teachers were female was founded. Below is a table of data collected by the U.S. Bureau of Labor in 2019. It shows us that there is a great divide between the number of female to male teachers.
This finding ultimately led me to understand that a permissive approach with students was not a weakness in my teaching, but an unconscious role that had been prescribed to me. Realizing that I was now looking for a habit that was informed by my gender, I went back to looking for scholarly articles that addressed this issue. However, it didn’t occur to me exactly what to do until I read the following passage from “Communion: The Female Search for Love” by Bell Hooks (2002):
“The strategy Norwood offered that I applied in my relationship, which had increasingly become a site of endless conflicts-some of which culminated in abusive behavior-was to respond by saying the word “oh”. For example: If your husband or partner did not return home at the time he stated he would, or at a reasonable hour, rather than complaining or saying anything to him about his behavior, the word “oh” should be stated. Uttering this single word would potentially defuse a volatile situation.”
I asked myself what my own version of “oh” was. I have over the years built up a defense strategy that I use whenever I sense tension or conflict arising. Instead of saying “oh” I simply apologize. When I sense that I have started to say something that might cause an argument my default is, "I'm sorry, lets just forget about it." It is a simple and easy way to change the mood. I have learned to apologize when I know I am right, when I know I haven’t done anything wrong, when someone feels bad, when something is inconvenient, the list goes on. It is an unconscious permissive habit that seems highly supportive to the other person but completely forfeits any control on my part.
I realize now that I apologize to my students all of the time. I constantly say, "I'm sorry you don't like it but...." or "I'm sorry I talked for so long, lets get to work" or "I'm sorry but I told you...." As a teacher, apologizing for myself demonstrates to my students that I was somehow in the wrong too. If I am to ever make the shift out of the permissive quadrant, I would need to pay closer attention to how I speak.
So, in the style of “Dear Data” I collected a week's worth of data on “Apologies”
My first step in collecting my research was to start to keep track of how many times a day I caught myself apologizing. I realized quickly that just collecting quantitative data would lead to a shallow understanding of my habit. So, I decided to start journaling about my apologies as soon as I could after I caught myself doing it.
As I started to journal I recognized that my reflex to apologize varied depending on where I was, who was there, how it was expressed and why it was being expressed. This lead me to the creation of the following key:
Using this key I was able to better track the information. I know that there are some that I may have missed. One of the biggest challenges that I faced was monitoring myself. I very quickly let my partners know what I was doing, so that they too could help point out when it happened.
This ultimately led to my data visualization:
Findings:
When I analyzed my data visualization I found a few patterns in behavior. These patterns were found by looking at a single days data and noticing the sequence created by "The reason expressed". Before collecting the data I believed that the apology was a reflex, or "an action that is performed as a response to a stimulus and without conscious thought." as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary. However, as I journaled about my habits I realized that the act of an apology was not always an unconscious response but an emotional response. The common feelings that presented themselves at the time of the apology
- Sympathy: Feeling bad for someone else's feelings or experiences
- Remorse/Regret: Feeling bad about something I said or did
- Guilt/Shame: Feeling like I was to blame for something that had gone wrong
Looking at the data, I concluded that in addition to reflex, guilt was the next highest reason why I apologized. This pattern occurred in both public and private settings, towards different people, and was expressed in different ways.
As the week progressed, I noticed an increase in the amount of times that I stopped myself from expressing the apology. This resistance first occurred while I was writing an email to a colleague. In my journal, I had written that I thought to myself that I should apologize for sending her the information so late. However, I decided not to because technically I had until the next day to send her the information and therefore I hadn't done anything "wrong". This line of thought transpired as a result of writing an email instead of speaking out loud. Looking at the times following this event it shows that I was more likely to resist apologizing when writing e-mails or texting. In addition I found that as the week progressed the amount of times that I resisted the urge to apologize increased.
References
Wachtel, T. (n.d.). Defining Resorative. Retrieved 1991, from https://www.iirp.edu/restorative-practices/defining-restorative/
Watchel, T. (2005, November). The next Step: Developing restorative communities.
Hooks, B. (2002). Communion: The Female Search for Love. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. (2020, February 3). Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/cps/demographics.htm
Comments
Post a Comment